Disposes of a writ application seeking to quash an order rejecting an arms licence application under family heirloom policy, holding that an alternative remedy of appeal exists.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.627 of 2017
====================================================== Dr. Deepak Kumar, S/o Sri Krishna Prasad, Resident of Mohalla - Khajurbanna, Post Mahendru, P.S. Sultanganj, Town & District - Patna
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. B.N. Pandey, Advocate Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K. Verma, AAG-3 Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, AC to AAG-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
02/ 01-11-2018 Heard Mr. B. N. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, learned AC to AAG3.
The present writ application has been filed for quashing the order dated 28.11.2016, contained in Memo No. 3424/Arms dated 28.11.2016 passed by Respondent No. 2, the District Magistrate, Patna, whereby the petitioner’s application for grant of arms licence under the family heirloom policy has been rejected since the petitioner failed to submit no objection from all the heirs of the licensee.
Patna High Court CWJC No.627 of 2017 (2) dt.01-11-2018
2/2
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no objection on behalf of the heirs of the licensee is only required under Rule 25(2) of the Arms Rules, 2016 in case licensee is dead but when the licensee is alive then there is no requirement of no objection.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to interfere since the alternative remedy of appeal under Section 18 of the Arms Act, 1959, is available to the petitioner.
In the circumstances, the petitioner, if so advised, may prefer an appeal before the Appellate Authority, i.e., Divisional Commissioner, Patna within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with application for condonation of delay whereupon the appellate authority will consider the application for condonation of delay in view of the fact that the writ application was pending before this Court.
With the above observation and direction, the present writ application is disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)
DKS/-
U
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dr. Deepak Kumar
The State of Bihar, through Home Secretary, Govt. of Bihar
District Magistrate, Patna
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
